Monday, May 01, 2006

Turkey aligns with Iran's Islamist bloc against the West

In a new signal of Turkey's alignment with the Islamist bloc, Turkish FM Abdullah Gul made it very clear that Turkey will not be drawn into any military operations against Iran.

According to the Dubai newspaper Al Bayan, Gul claimed that during her visit to Ankara last Tuesday, US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice requested the use of the Incirlik air base for an American strike against Iranian nuclear installations.Gul says he turned her down flat.

Turkey has also reportedly turned down permission for the US to build a new air base in eastern Turkey between Lake Van and the Iranian border. From there, Iranian nuclear sites concentrated in Northern and Northwest Iran would have been in easy reach of US bombers..including Iran's top-secret site at Neyshabour.

On the other side of the coin, Turkey's relationship with Iran has blossomed sinced the current Islamist government took power. Turkey and Iran just completed a high level conference between Turkey’s Ambassador Hasano Turcan Turkoglu and Iran Interior Minister Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi to coordinate military and security cooperation Sunday in Teheran. (Hat tip to Willard @Crossfire War)

Both representatives trotted out the usual phrases about bi-lateral cooperation, with Iran's Pour-Mohammadi adding that increased bilateral ties would dissatisfy the Americans and Europeans.

A big point of conjuction between Turkey and Iran is, of course, the Kurds, whom both countries despise and whom both countries do not want to have any kind of autonomy. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration yielded to Turkish concerns on this matter when we invaded Iraq..why, I can't imagine, since Turkey obstructed our efforts there to the limits of its power. Turkeys'refusal to allow US troops to utilize our bases there and deploy a second front for the Iraq invasion delayed Saddam Hussein’s overthrow by at least six weeks, maybe more.

Platitudes about economic - industrial linkage, `bi-lateral relations' and generic 'security' concerns aside, it is obvious that from Pour-Mohammadi referral to their relationship displeasing the Americans and Europeans means that there are almost certainly military and strategic links now in place as well.

This would be a major coup for Iran if true, because it would provide a strategic buffer for a significant part of Iran's border, would break the NATO alliance and because of Turkey's strategic location next to the Balkans and the Caucasus - areas Turkey once ruled and may wish to dominate again. The Balkans have always been the Islamic route to European invasion by Islam, and there are already the well armed Muslim enclaves of Bosnia and Kossovo in the region, thanks to the West's military attacks on the Serbs and Western compliance with the ethnic cleansing of non-Muslims from these areas.

Turkey is probably figuring that the US will not go through with any military action against Iran at this time, because they see the Bush administration’s domestic situation as too shaky to undertake any effective military strike there. The Erdogan government may also be reading the MSM and see Bush's Republican party facing defeats in the mid-term elections in November. As a country with a parliamentary system, they may very well be misunderstanding the relationship between party and president. They see the US retreating in Iraq and its coalition of Sunni autocracies as increasingly vulnerable to the joint offensive of Iran, The Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda.

Let's see, anonymous....Turkey is supposed to be a US ally, no? And a member of NATO? Not to mention all the US aid Turkey has received, starting with the Marshal Plan, that preserved Turkish independence?

One would think that a loyal ally wouild maybe take a few risks for that relationship. But the current Islamist government of Erdogan is very different.

That's why they also refused to let the US launch an attack against Saddam from their territory, causing additional expense, difficulty and weeks of delay to the US. It's also why Turkey's once tight relationship with Israel and with NATO is faltering.

Another thing to condsider, `anonymous'..as Iran gets stronger, gets its nukes together and dominates the region - where do you think that's going to leave the `junior partner'?

Think it's going to make Turkey any more secure?

Look at it and think about what Sunni Turkey would end up with next to a powerful Shia Iran.

I do not argue that Turkey should have let the U.S. launch the attack on Iraq instead of:

making some phony vote where a majority of parliament votes in favor of allowing an attack but whoops! we didn't get an absolute majority so we can't do it...no, we're not holding another vote; why would we do that?

I also STRONGLY agree that a nuclear Iran would be extremely bad for Turkey's security and would probably result in an attempt by Turkey to develop a nuclear bomb which would of course further destabilize the region.

However, in the current context of the U.S. planning an air based assault on Iran, it makes absolutely no sense for Turkey to collaborate given that the U.S. is fully capable of carrying out such an assault without operation impediment from Iraq. The sole reason the U.S. wants Turkey is that it is good PR, and no responsible leader would put a nation's security and economy at unnecessary jeapardy just so your ally can score a few PR points in the national arena.

If you can show me some reasons why the U.S.'s operations in Iran would be jeapardized by Turkey's failure to open up Incerlik, I might be inclined to agree with you.

Finally, there is no alliance between Turkey an Iran in which Turkey is a partner, junior or otherwise.

First of all, let me compliment you on the polite way that you have disagreed with me. I very much respect that, as I don't claim to be the font of all wisdom and thus can learn.

I perhaps don't understand your first point. Should Turkey have allowed the US to launch an attack on Saddam from Turkey or not? It cost the US, and I think it should have been allowed. And it would have been under Turkey's previous secular goverments, IMO.

It leads into the second point you made, that use of Incerlik and other bases is not `necessary'. neither of us know that for certain, do we? If Secretary Rice in fact asked,she had a reason.You say its simple PR. I don't agree.

The logistics of a strike from Turkey vis a vis Iran make the job much easier because of the proximity. In air strkes, the longer the distance,the more problematic an attack becomes and the more chance an enemy has to prepare and lay down missle barrages and firefields. Even ten to fifteen minutes advance warning can make a difference. Proximity also allows longer, more effective bombing missions and better concentration on multiple targets with less time needed fo refueling.

I respectfully disagree that there is no security cooperation between Turkey and Iran, as you will see if you click on the link. They are collaberating against the Kurds, which Iran likewise despises at the very least, and from the Iranian foreign minister's remarks it is obvious, at least to me, that they are cooperating in other areas as well.

I have no personal jones about Turkey, but it is a fact that Turkey's relationship with the West is not as firm as it was pre-Erdogan. It appears to me also obvious that they are NOT behaving as an ally and to some degree have chosen sides.

To what degree, it remains to be seen.

Thanks again for coming by and adding to the discussion. I appreciate it.

> I perhaps don't understand your first point. Should Turkey have allowed the US to launch an attack on Saddam from Turkey or not? It cost the US, and I think it should have been allowed. And it would have been under Turkey's previous secular goverments, IMO.

I was agreeing with you that Turkey should have let the U.S. attack from Turkey, though I am not sure that the secular parties would have agreed - the war is and was extremely unpopular in Turkey and 100% of secular (center-left) CHP voted against the proposal, though they were probably just trying to score political points and didn't think that AKP would let the bill fail. The failure to attack from two fronts probably contributed to the instability after the war that continues to this day, which was obviously not in Turkey's interests regardless of their feelings on the war.

>It leads into the second point you made, that use of Incerlik and other bases is not `necessary'. neither of us know that for certain, do we? If Secretary Rice in fact asked,she had a reason.You say its simple PR. I don't agree.

I agree with you as you state in your next paragraph that proximity is important. However, Incerlik is in central Turkey and is much farther away from Iran than Bagdad, so it seems to me that the main reason the U.S. wants to attack from Turkey is so that they can say they have support of a Muslim country.

>I respectfully disagree that there is no security cooperation between Turkey and Iran, as you will see if you click on the link. They are collaberating against the Kurds, which Iran likewise despises at the very least, and from the Iranian foreign minister's remarks it is obvious, at least to me, that they are cooperating in other areas as well.

I read the link, and it appears to be mainly that they are having discussions and talking about what they "should" be doing. When I look at the current situation, I don't think Turkey is taking sides against the U.S.; rather they are trying to encourage a diplomatic solution since war with Iran will have a significantly negative impact on the Turkish economy. Also, if Iran and Turkey were trully cooperating, the U.S. would not be offering Turkey permission to strike PKK hidouts in Northern Iran when an attack on Iran occurs.

Finally, another reason why Turkey has become less pro-American recently is that many of the countries that oppose Turkey's entry to the EU like Germany and France are also anti-US; Turkey scored a lot of political points with them when they didn't let the U.S. attack Iraq. If Turkey gets rejected from the EU, you will probably see them adopt a foreign policy that is closer to 100% pro-US & Israel.

Ordinary Germans are against it because they've rubbed shoulders with their Turkish immigrants for a long time and familiarity has bred a profound contempt.

Turkey's treatment of its Kurds is shameful. If you read the Turkish (English translation) newspapers, their gut-level hatred is apparent. And they've bought the wrath of the Kurds on themselves with their generations of repression.

Re: Distance between Baghdad and Central Turkey, you might consider that the US may be reluctant to use Iraq because of the fragile (but slowly stabilizing) political situation there and because of the proximity of what amounts to Iranian troops in the Badr Force and al -Sadr's Mahdi Army. I still think that it's more than PR and if Rice actually asked Turkey for this, they should have complied...if they truly are our allies.

We can agree to disagree over Turkish/ Iranian security cooperation..I simply read it differently than you do.

I actually hope that you are correct and I am wrong about this, and Turkey does evolve into a 100% pro US- Israel policy.

dymphna - Maybe Germany and other European countries would have better relations with their immigrant communities if like the U.S. they actually had some method of integration.

In the U.S. anyone born here is a citizen, so we don't have 3rd and 4th generation immigrants who don't have citizenship and make up a permanent second/third class.

I note that Your attitude towards Turks in Germany is the same attitude that you denounce the Turkish newspapers of having towards Kurds. I could have entitled this post

Also, while Turkey's treatment of Kurds is shameful, if Germany had been fighting Turkish terrorists since 1980 in a war that had killed over 20,000 people, I doubt German hands would be clean either (though they would probably still be cleaner than the hands of the Turkish military).

What is the prospect of Iran invading Turkey? The US wants Turkey because of the drugs. If they can't get the drugs because Iran holds it, what happens to the shadow government in the US. How will it be funded?Just a thought, from a higher mind.